200' on air for 5 min bottom time?

[Kevrumbo]

I was going to do the Hermes trip (on normoxic trimix) this year, but work got it the way

IIRC someone's spools are still inside the engine room from the last trip, because they also ran out of He on the last day and when he went to recover them on the final (air) dive he couldn't find the way in...

Yes that was teammate Ferg Peoples in 2009, and we all were glad he made the conscious decision not to retrieve the line & spools --at over 48m deep and totally narced out-of-his-mind on deep air after diving the two previous weeks on 21/35 Trimix.

Warm water yes, but wicked currents & low viz at depth on Hermes along with drifting deco; if the dive skiff loses sight of your SMB in the twilight of late afternoon, the next "land mass" would have been tiny Diego Garcia:shocked2:!

So alright, those are a few anecdotes of instances where things can potentially go badly wrong on Deep Air (or have gone wrong in previous posts of this thread).

 

[Tortuga68]

I know it was Ferg, I just didn't want to name & shame him... I'll be doing some dives with him next week and don't want him mad at me Actually it was Dave who told me the story when we were discussing air vs trimix, so yes it's germain

 

[Kevrumbo]

The "Puerto Galera" 20/20 tropical mix was first recommended to me by the crew at Tech Asia as a way of economizing a Trimix blend and taking away some of the narcosis at 45m and deeper. END of 20/20 Trimix is only 46m at MOD 7.0 ATA (60m depth), but for the wrecks & warmer calm waters of Truk Lagoon, it is a good compromise between deep air & the expense of a Standard Bottom Mix like 18/45. (Here in the cold home waters of SoCal though, it breaths a little easier than deep air, but 20/20 is just as narcotic at 45m & deeper)

20/20 also works with Ratio Deco:blinking:. . .

 

[Bombay High]

... But they actually expect you to work for it.

zing :d

---------- Post added June 4th, 2013 at 07:04 PM ----------

For the WWII Aircraft Carrier wreck HMS Hermes in Sri Lanka 2009,

This vessel was bought by the Indian Navy after the Falklands war, and I have worked on a hull patch that was done in 1994. It was renamed the INS Virat.

... Unless I am confused ... which is also probable.

---------- Post added June 4th, 2013 at 07:08 PM ----------

Ok ... after a couple of phone calls, I am prompted to ask whether that vessel is really the HMS Hermes.

 

[Tortuga68]

Ok ... after a couple of phone calls, I am prompted to ask whether that vessel is really the HMS Hermes

There were at least 10 different ships called the HMS Hermes, one of which is the one you're talking about which served in the Falklands

This is the one in Sri Lanka: HMS Hermes (95) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[DCBC]

If its not true, it should be easy to give me a list of a bunch of deaths. Deeper than 100', END less than 100'. ...And who am I to say? Refer to line 1 of this post. Surely you will deliver, right? ...I don't need to speak for anyone else or how they feel. I don't care about feelings. I care about results and evidence. High ENDs make a dangerous activity more dangerous, and the only reason to not use helium is nickel rocketry and false bravado.

Perhaps some statistics compiled from the 2010 DAN Fatality Workshop are in-order:

DAN

• DAN America insured member claims for 2000, involving 187 dive-related deaths (Denoble, Pollock et al. 2008)
• DAN Europe insured member claims for 1996-2008, involving 144 dive-related deaths
• DAN America fatality and injury databases for 1992-2003, including:
— Most common risk factors in 947 cases resulting from open-circuit (OC) diving (Denoble, Caruso et al. 2008)
— A case-control study of 165 fatal and 135 nonfatal arterial gas embolism (AGE) incidents (Denoble, Vann et al. 2005)
— A study of fatalities involving diabetes mellitus (DM), including 37 DM cases and 938 non-DM cases (Denoble, Pollock et al. 2006)

Conclusions

"The most common disabling injuries associated with death were asphyxia, AGE and acute cardiac-related events. The most common root causes were gas-supply problems, emergency ascent, cardiac health issues, entrapment/entanglement and buoyancy trouble.

The risk of death while diving increased with age, starting in the early 30s. This is likely due to the naturally increased prevalence of cardiac disease with age, but an increased association of AGE and asphyxia were also associated with aging."

* DAN doesn't list Narcosis in their analysis. Is this because they feel it's not important, or so important that they don't list it? Statistically however you better stop diving altogether after 30, unless you accept increased risk...

BSAC Incident Report (U.K.) 1998-2009, 197 Diving Fatalities

So we have 5 diver fatalities (3.6%) attributed to Narcosis in an 11 year period.

From page 111 of the BSAC report:

Nitrogen Narcosis

"Nitrogen narcosis is recorded as the primary causal factor infive cases. All cases relate to divers using air, and the depths were 60 m, 60 m, 57 m, 55 m and 51 m. All cases involved divers making poor decisions and becoming confused at depth. Three cases involved divers failing to follow depth and time constraints. One case involved a diver becoming confused and unable to deal with a tangled rope, and in one case the diver appears to have simply lost consciousness. BSAC has always stated that the limit for air diving is 50 m (and then only for suitably qualified divers)."

BSAC has a 50 M maximum depth policy and all Divers noted were diving past the limits of their training.

BSAC lists Narcosis in their 11 year summary and have identified statistically that the chance of dieing from Narcosis is the same as dieing from being trapped in a Wreck. The moral of the story? Either don't dive past 50 FSW or into a wreck, unless you will accept the remote risk. If your going to die with SCUBA you have a 3.5% chance of dieing from Narcosis...

PADI 409 Diver Fatalities (US: 232 or other countries: 177), all categories (working, training and non-training) from 1989-1998

On Page 133, PADI reported that: Of the "Deep Diving" fatalities, only one was deeper than 100' (104 FSW).

"Locations and depths were TX-90’, UT-80’, CA-100’, NY-100’, England-105’, Israel-88’, NJ-104’, WI-70’, NY-38’, WA-80’, WI-92’, TX-90’, England-51’, GA-45’, MA-95’, England-90’. "

* PADI doesn't consider IGN as a contributing factor in it's reporting process. Is this because they feel it's not important, or so important that they've made the same mistake as DAN?

So I'd really like to know where you are getting your statistics from? Of course you'll be able to substantiate your claim that: ""virtually EVERY death below 100' has had an END greater than 100'" wont you??

I'm sure DAN and PADI will be interested in knowing, as you seem to have information that no else seems to have. Do you think they're keeping it a secret?

 

[PfcAJ]

So what you're saying is that diving deep on air is more dangerous than having a low END? Check. Thanks for making my point.

I cannot give you a list of deep divers who did not die with a low END. You could, however, give me a list of deep divers that did die with a low (sub 100') END. But you probably can't, and if you could, the list would be REALLY short. A handful maybe. Prove me wrong. Prove to me that there are a bunch of low END fatalities out there.

I can provide you with a list of dead deep air divers, and I've done it before in a similar thread with you. Want me to dig it up? I've asked you for some names of divers who died deep diving with a sub-100' END, and you NEVER deliver. Not once. Why?

As for the PADI report, there were certainly more deep air deaths than 1 from 1989-1998. Poor reporting is the obvious cause here.

 

[Abdullah]

So what you're saying is that diving deep on air is more dangerous than having a low END? Check. Thanks for making my point.

I cannot give you a list of deep divers who did not die with a low END. You could, however, give me a list of deep divers that did die with a low (sub 100') END. But you probably can't, and if you could, the list would be REALLY short. A handful maybe. Prove me wrong. Prove to me that there are a bunch of low END fatalities out there.

I can provide you with a list of dead deep air divers, and I've done it before in a similar thread with you. Want me to dig it up? I've asked you for some names of divers who died deep diving with a sub-100' END, and you NEVER deliver. Not once. Why?

As for the PADI report, there were certainly more deep air deaths than 1 from 1989-1998. Poor reporting is the obvious cause here.

Show your data that proves you right and the three major recreational dive statistics agencies wrong. List all the data please, not just the points that favor your argument.

 

[PfcAJ]

How would you like me to go about giving you a non-list? I can't prove a negative (obviously), so I'm asking for someone to prove the positive (a list of divers with low ENDs who died on deep dives). I've been following this stuff for a few years now, and I've yet to come across any, and no one has helped me find any despite multiple requests for assistance.

 

[danvolker]

I think the deep air versus trimix argument will go pretty much like the freedive fin versus split fins argument.....I know that freedive fins are better than split fins for most divers....and their are many split fin wearers that "know" that for their use, and for them, that split fins are are the best, and that my freedive fin argument is nonsense for them..

We have a huge population of divers that are going to do what they want to do, because they have been doing it for some time, and they don't care to change. I can PROVE to almost any coordinated diver, that Freedive fins will be better for open water diving --for them, than split fins will be....but few will hear me, and few would even consider anything but arguing about this..This is where we are with deep air or trimix..as a choice.

In other words, am I the only one that thinks this "argument" on deep air should be about over by now?